Post on 09-Feb-2018
1©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Optical Networking: Optical Networking: Recent Developments, Recent Developments,
Issues, and TrendsIssues, and TrendsRaj Jain
CTO and Co-founderNayna Networks, Inc.
180 Rose Orchard Way, San Jose, CA 95134 Email: jain@acm.org
www.nayna.com
and http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~jain/
4©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
1.
Trends in Networking2.
Core Network Issues: DWDM, OEO VS OOO
3.
Metro Network Issues: Next Gen SONET vs Ethernet with RPR
4.
Access Networks Issues: Passive optical networks5.
IP Control Plane: MPLS, GMPLS
OverviewOverview
6©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Life Cycles of TechnologiesLife Cycles of Technologies
Time
Number of Problems Solved
Research Productization
7©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Hype Cycles of TechnologiesHype Cycles of Technologies
Potential
TimeResearch Hype Dis
illusionmentSuccess or
Failure
8©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Industry GrowthIndustry Growth
Time
Number ofCompanies
New Entrants
Consoli- dation
Stable Growth
10©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Trend: Back to ILECsTrend: Back to ILECs1. CLECs to ILECs
ILEC: Slow, steady, predictable. CLEC: Aggressive, Need to build up fast
New networks with newest technology No legacy issues
2. Back to Voice CLECs wanted to start
with data
ILECs want to migrate
to data Equipment that support voice circuits but allow packet based (hybrids) are more important than those that allow only packet based
11©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Sparse and Dense WDMSparse and Dense WDM
10Mbps Ethernet (10Base-F) uses 850 nm
100 Mbps Ethernet (100Base-FX) + FDDI use 1310 nm
Some telecommunication lines use 1550 nm
WDM: 850nm + 1310nm or 1310nm + 1550nm
Dense Closely spaced ≈
0.1 -
2 nm separation
Coarse = 2 to 25 nm = 4 to 12 λ’s
Wide = Different Wavebands
12©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Optical Networking: Key EnablerOptical Networking: Key Enabler
1980 AT&T installed Boston-Washington Fiber cable
1985 Poole at U of Southampton discovered EDFA Erbium-Doped Fiber Amplifiers (EDFAs)
1991 First commercial EDFA by Bell-Labs
Up to 30 dB amplification
Flat response in 1535-1560 nm Fiber loss is minimum in this region
DWDM revolution
λGain
1535 1560
Signal Signal
Pump Pump
13©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Recent DWDM RecordsRecent DWDM Records
32λ× 5 Gbps to 9300 km (1998)
16λ×
10 Gbps to 6000 km (NTT’96)
160λ×
20 Gbps (NEC’00)
128λ×
40 Gbps to 300 km (Alcatel’00)
64λ×
40 Gbps to 4000 km (Lucent’02)
19λ×
160 Gbps (NTT’99)
7λ×
200 Gbps (NTT’97)
1λ×1200 Gbps to 70 km using TDM (NTT’00)
1022 Wavelengths on one fiber (Lucent’99)Potential: 58 THz = 50 Tbps on 10,000 λ’sRef: IEEE J. on Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics, 11/2000.
Distance
Bit rate λ
15©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
ω1
-Δ, ω1
, ω2
, ω2
+ΔΔ= ω2
-
ω1
FourFour--Wave MixingWave Mixing
If two signals travel in the same phase for a long time, new signals are generated.
16©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Core Optical NetworksCore Optical Networks
Higher Speed: 10 Gbps to 40 Gbps to 160 Gbps
Longer Distances: 600 km to 6000 km
More Wavelengths: 16 λ’s to 160 λ’s
All-optical Switching: OOO vs OEO Switching
17©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Ref: “Ultra everything,”
Telephony, October 16, 2000
Optical Transport ProductsOptical Transport ProductsProduct λ’s Gb/s km Avail-
abilitySiemens/Optisphere TransXpress 80 40 250 2001
160 10 250 2001Alcatel 1640 OADM 160 2.5 2300 2001
80 10 330 2001Corvis
Optical Network Gateway 160 2.5 3200 2000
40 10 3200 2000Ciena Multiwave
CoreStream 160 10 1600 2001
Nortel Optera LH4000 56 10 4000 2000Optera LH 5000 104 40 1200 2002
Sycamore SN10000 160 10 800 200140 10 4000 2001
Cisco ONS 15800 160 10 2000 2002
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=19881
X
√
√
√√
√
X
√
19©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
OEO vs OOO SwitchesOEO vs OOO Switches
OEO:
Requires knowing data rate and format, e.g., 10 Gbps SONET
Can multiplex lower rate signals
Cost/space/power increases linearly with data rate
OOO:
Data rate and format independent Data rate easily upgraded
Sub-wavelength mux/demux difficult
Cost/space/power relatively independent of rate
Can switch multiple ckts per port (waveband)
Issues: Wavelength conversion, monitoring
20©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Optical Time Division MuxingOptical Time Division Muxing
16 streams of 10 Gbps = 160 Gbps on one wavelength
A laser produces short pulses. Pulse stream divided in to 16 substreams
Each substream modulated by different source. Combined.
Splitter Delay lines Modulators Combiner
1 1
0
1
0 1 1
1
0 1
0
1
0 1 0
1
Source 1 Source 2 Source 3 Source 4
Bit Multiplexing
21©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
OTDM SwitchingOTDM Switching
A laser interacts with the stream every 16th
bit
Four-Wave Multiplexing (FWM) converts the bit to another wavelength
The bit (wavelength) is filtered out
Another bit is added in its place.
Ref: Siemens Claims 160-Gbit/s Milestone, Lightreading, November 28, 2003, http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=44067
Switch16x10G 16x10G
10G10G
22©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
SONETSONET
Synchronous optical network
Standard for digital optical transmission
Developed originally by Bellcore to allow mid-span meet between carriers: MCI and AT&T. Standardized by ANSI and then by ITU
Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH)
You can lease a SONET connection from carriers
City A City B
Carriers
23©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
SS
S S
E E
SONET FunctionsSONET Functions
Protection: Allows redundant Line or paths
Fast Restoration: 50ms using rings
Sophisticated OAM&P
Ideal for Voice: No queues. Guaranteed delay
Fixed Payload Rates: 51M, 155M, 622M, 2.4G, 9.5G Rates do not match data rates of 10M, 100M, 1G, 10G
Static rates not suitable for bursty traffic
One Payload per Stream
High Cost
24©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Optical Transport Network (OTN)Optical Transport Network (OTN)
G.709 Digital Wrapper designed for WDM networks
OTNn.k
= n
wavelengths at kth
rate, 2.5, 10, 40 Gbps plus one Optical Supervisory Channel (OSC)
OTNnr.k = Reduced OTNn.k Without OSC
λ
Mux
Amplifier
Optical ADM
Amplifier
λ
Mux/Demux
Trans. Sec
Multiplex SecChannel
Multiplex Sec
Trans. Sec Trans. Sec Trans. Sec
OSC
25©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
SONET/SDH
OCh Payload Unit (OPUk)OCh Data Unit (ODUk)
OCh Transmission Unit (OTUk)
Optical Channel (Och)Optical Multiplex Section (OMSn)
Optical Transmission Section (OTSn)
Payload
OPU
OHOTU OH
ODU OH FEC
1 16 3824 4080FA OH
7 14
OTN Layers and Frame FormatOTN Layers and Frame Format
OTU1 Frame Format: 4×4080 Octets/125 ms Forward Error Correction (FEC) increases distance by 2x to 4x.
Frame Alignment (FA).
26©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
SummarySummary
DWDM systems use 1550 nm band due to EDFA
O/O/O switches are bit rate and data format independent
SONET/SDH have ring based protection
OTN uses FEC digital wrapper and allows WDM
28©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Metro Optical Metro Optical NetworksNetworks
Raj Jain CTO and Co-founder
Nayna Networks, Inc. 180 Rose Orchard Way, San Jose, CA 95134
Email: jain@acm.orgwww.nayna.com
and http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~jain/
29©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
OverviewOverview
Gigabit Ethernet
10 G Ethernet
Resilient Packet Rings
Next Generation SONET: VCAT, GFP, LCAS
31©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
LAN to WAN ConvergenceLAN to WAN Convergence
Past: Shared media in LANs. Point to point in WANs.
Today: No media sharing in LANs
Datalink protocols limited to frame formats
No distance limitations due to MAC. Only Phy.
10 GbE over 40 km without repeaters
Ethernet End-to-end.
Ethernet carrier access service:$1000/mo 100Mbps
E E E SS
S SE E
32©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
1 GbE: Key Design Decisions1 GbE: Key Design Decisions
P802.3z Update to 802.3 Compatible with 802.3 frame format, services, management
1000 Mb vs. 800 Mb Vs 622 Mbps Single
data rate
LAN
distances only
No Full-duplex only Shared
Mode Allows both hub and switch based networks
No one makes or uses GbE Hubs
Same min and max frame size as 10/100 Mbps Changes to CSMA/CD
protocol
Transmit longer if short packets
33©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
10 GbE: Key Design Decisions10 GbE: Key Design Decisions
P802.3ae Update to 802.3 Compatible with 802.3 frame format, services, management
10 Gbps vs. 9.5 Gbps. Both
rates.
LAN and MAN
distances
Full-duplex only No Shared
Mode Only switch based networks. No Hubs.
Same min and max frame size as 10/100/1000 Mbps Point-to-point No CSMA/CD
protocol
10.000 Gbps at MAC interface Flow Control between MAC and PHY
Clock jitter: 20 or 100 ppm for 10GbE Incompatible
with 4.6 ppm for SONET
34©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
10 GbE PMD Types10 GbE PMD Types
S = Short Wave, L=Long Wave, E=Extra Long Wave
R = Regular reach (64b/66b), W=WAN (64b/66b + SONET Encapsulation), X = 8b/10b
4 = 4 λ’s
PMD Description MMF SMF10GBASE-R:10GBASE-SR 850nm Serial LAN 300 m N/A10GBASE-LR 1310nm Serial LAN N/A 10 km10GBASE-ER 1550nm Serial LAN N/A 40 km
10GBASE-X:10GBASE-LX4 1310nm WWDM LAN 300 m 10 km
10GBASE-W:10GBASE-SW 850nm Serial WAN 300 m N/A10GBASE-LW 1310nm Serial WAN N/A 10 km10GBASE-EW 1550nm Serial WAN N/A 40 km10GBASE-LW4 1310nm WWDM WAN 300 m 10 km
35©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
10GbE PHYs10GbE PHYs10G MAC10G MAC
10G Media Independent Interface (XGMII) or 10G Attachment Unit Interface (XAUI)
10G Media Independent Interface (XGMII) or 10G Attachment Unit Interface (XAUI)
CWDM LAN PHY
8b/10b
CWDM LAN PHY
8b/10b
Serial LAN PHY
64b/65b
Serial LAN PHY
64b/65b
Serial WAN PHY
64b/65b + WIS
Serial WAN PHY
64b/65b + WIS
CX4 PMD
XAUI+
CX4 PMD
XAUI+
CWDM PMD
1310 nm
CWDM PMD
1310 nm
Serial PMD
850 nm
Serial PMD
850 nm
Serial PMD
1310 nm
Serial PMD
1310 nm
Serial PMD
1550 nm
Serial PMD
1550 nm
Serial PMD
850 nm
Serial PMD
850 nm
Serial PMD
1310 nm
Serial PMD
1310 nm
Serial PMD
1550 nm
Serial PMD
1550 nm
CX4 LX4 SR LR ER SW EWLW
36©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
10GBASE10GBASE--CX4CX4
Twinax
cable with 8 pairs
Based on Infiniband
4X copper phy. IB4X connectors.
For data center applications (Not for horizontal wiring):
Switch-to-switch links
Switch-to-server links
External backplanes for stackables
Standard: Start: Dec 2002 End: Dec 2003
IEEE 802.3ak, http://www.ieee802.org/3/ak
37©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
10GBASE10GBASE--TT
New PHY for data center and horizontal wiring
Compatible with existing 802.3ae MAC, XGMII, XAUI
Standard: Start: Nov 2003 Finish: Jul 2006
100 m on Cat-7 and 55+ m on Cat-6
Cost 0.6 of optical PHY. Greater reach than CX4
10-level coded PAM signaling with 3 bits/symbol 833 MBaud/pair => 450 MHz bandwidth w FEXT cancellation
(1GBASE-T uses 5-level PAM with 2 bits/symbol, 125 MBaud/pair, 80 MHz w/o FEXT)
Full-duplex only. 1000BASE-T line code and FEC designed for half-duplex.
http://www.ieee802.org/3/10GBT
38©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
10 GbE over Dark Fiber10 GbE over Dark Fiber
Need only LAN PMD up to 40 km. No SONET overhead. No protection.
Metro Optical Network
10GbE
10GbE
10GbE
39©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
10 GbE over SONET/SDH 10 GbE over SONET/SDH
Using WAN PMD. Legacy SONET. Protection via rings. ELTE = Ethernet Line Terminating Equipment
Metro SONET Net
SONET ADM
10GbE
10GbE
10GbE
40©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Metro Ethernet Services Metro Ethernet Services
$18k for 10G ports, $380 for 1G (November 2003). $82M 10G of $11.2B Ethernet.
Transparent LAN service
10GbE
10GbE
10GbE
Carrier Network
10GbE
41©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Virtual Private LAN Services (VPLS)Virtual Private LAN Services (VPLS)
Ethernet Internet Access
Ethernet Virtual Private Line
Ethernet Virtual Private LAN
ISP
42©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Metro Ethernet ServicesMetro Ethernet Services
User-to-network Interface (UNI) = RJ45
Ethernet Virtual Connection (EVC) = Flows
Ethernet Line Service (ELS) = Point-to-point
Ethernet LAN Service (E-LAN) = multipoint-to-multipoint
CE PEPE PEPE CE
CE PEPE PEPE CE
CE PEPE PEPE CE
43©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Feature SONET Ethernet RemedyPayload Rates 51M , 155M ,
622M , 2.4G,9.5G
10M , 100M , 1G,10G
10GE at 9.5G
Payload RateGranularity
Fixed √Any VirtualConcatenation
Bursty Payload No √Yes Link CapacityAdjustment Scheme
Payload Count One √M ultiple Packet GFPProtection √Ring M esh Resilient Packet
Ring (RPR)OAM &P √Yes No In RPRSynchronousTraffic
√Yes No M PLS + RPR
Restoration √50 ms M inutes Rapid Spanning TreeCost High √Low ConvergingUsed in Telecom Enterprise
SONET vs EthernetSONET vs Ethernet
44©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Feature SO N ET Ethernet R em edyPayload Rates 51M , 155M ,
622M , 2.4G ,9.5G
10M , 100M , 1G ,10G
10G E at 9.5G
Payload RateG ranularity
Fixed √A ny V irtualC oncatenation
Bursty Payload N o √Y es Link CapacityA djustm ent Schem e
Payload Count O ne √M ultiple Packet G FPProtection √Ring M esh R esilient Packet
R ing (RPR)O A M & P √Y es N o In RPRSynchronousTraffic
√Y es N o M PLS + RPR
Restoration √50 m s M inutes R apid Spanning TreeCost H igh √Low C onvergingU sed in Telecom Enterprise
SONET vs Ethernet: RemediesSONET vs Ethernet: Remedies
45©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Enterprise vs Carrier EthernetEnterprise vs Carrier EthernetEnterprise
Distance: up to 2km
Scale:
Few K MAC addresses
4096 VLANs
Protection: Spanning tree
Path determined by spanning tree
Simple service
Priority Aggregate QoS
No performance/Error monitoring (OAM)
Carrier
Up to 100 km
Millions of MAC Addresses
Millions of VLANs Q-in-Q
Rapid spanning tree (Gives 1s, need 50ms)
Traffic engineered path
SLA
Need per-flow QoS
Need performance/BER
46©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Networking and ReligionNetworking and ReligionI believe in God.
I believe in rings
Both are based on a set of beliefs
47©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
RPR: Key FeaturesRPR: Key Features
Dual Ring topology
Supports broadcast and multicast
Packet based Continuous bandwidth granularity
Max 256 nodes per ring
MAN distances: Several hundred kilometers.
Gbps speeds: Up to 10 Gbps
A
CD
B
48©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
RPR Features (Cont)RPR Features (Cont)
Both rings are used (unlike SONET)
Normal transmission on the shortest path
Destination stripping Spatial reuse Multicast packets are source stripped
Several Classes of traffic: A0, A1, B-CIR, B-EIR, C
Too many features and alternatives too soon (756 pages)
A
CD
BA
CD
B
50©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Networking: Failures vs SuccessesNetworking: Failures vs Successes
1980: Broadband (vs baseband)
1984: ISDN (vs Modems)
1986: MAP/TOP (vs Ethernet)
1988: OSI (vs TCP/IP)
1991: DQDB
1994: CMIP (vs SNMP)
1995: FDDI (vs Ethernet)
1996: 100BASE-VG or AnyLan
(vs Ethernet)
1997: ATM to Desktop (vs Ethernet)
1998: Integrated Services (vs MPLS)
1999: Token Rings (vs Ethernet)
51©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Requirements for SuccessRequirements for Success
Low Cost: Low startup cost Evolution
High Performance
Killer Applications
Timely completion
Manageability
Interoperability
Coexistence with legacy LANs Existing infrastructure is more important than new
technology
52©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
SONET Virtual ConcatenationSONET Virtual Concatenation
VCAT: Bandwidth in increments of VT1.5 or STS-1
For example: 10 Mbps Ethernet in 7 T1’s = VT1.5-7v 100 Mbps Ethernet in 2 OC-1 = STS-1-2v,
1GE in 7 STS-3c = STS-3c-7v
The concatenated channels can travel different paths Need buffering at the ends to equalize delay
All channels are administered together. Common processing only at end-points.
53©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
SONET LCASSONET LCAS
Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme for Virtual Concatenation
Allows hitless addition or deletion of channels from virtually concatenated SONET/SDH connections
Control messages are exchanged between end-points to accomplish the change
STS-1-2v STS-1-3vMessages
54©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
LCAS (Cont)LCAS (Cont)
Provides enhanced reliability. If some channels fail, the remaining channels can be recombined to produce a lower speed stream
Working STS-1-3v
Protection STS-1-2vEnd-to-end STS-1-5v
55©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Generic Framing Procedure (GFP)Generic Framing Procedure (GFP)
Allows multiple payload types to be aggregated in one SONET path and delivered separately at destination
GFP GFP
GbE
FC
GbE
FC
Legacy SONET
Legacy SONET/SDH NextGen SONET/SDH
Payload
Ethernet
Payload
Fiber Ch.
Payload
GFP E
EF
FFFF
EE E F
56©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Transparent GFPTransparent GFP
Allows LAN/SAN PHY extension over SONET links Control codes carried as if it were a dark fiber.
FCGFP GFPLegacy SONETFC FC FC≡
Problem: 8b/10b results in 1.25 Gb stream for 1 GbE
Solution: Compress 80 PHY bits to 65 bits 1.02 Gbps SONET payload per GbE
57©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
SummarySummary
10 GbE does not support CSMA/CD. Two speeds: 10,000 Mbps and 9,584.640 Mbps
RPR to provide carrier grade reliability
58©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Summary (Cont)Summary (Cont)
Virtual concatenation allows a carrier to use any arbitrary number of STS-1’s or T1’s for a given connection. These STS-1’s can take different paths.
LCAS allows the number of STS-1’s to be dynamically changed
Frame-based GFP allows multiple packet types to share a connection
Transparent GFP allows 8b/10 coded LANs/SANs to use PHY layer connectivity at lower bandwidth.
60©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Optical Optical Access NetworksAccess Networks
Raj Jain CTO and Co-founder
Nayna Networks, Inc. 180 Rose Orchard Way, San Jose, CA 95134
Email: jain@acm.orgwww.nayna.com
and http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~jain/
61©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Fiber to the x (FTTx)
Passive Optical Networks: What? How? Where? Why?
Recent Developments
OverviewOverview
62©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Service Node
ONU
FTTH
FTTB
FTTC
FTTCab
Optical Fiber
PON SystemxDSL
OLTONU NT
NT
Passive Optical Splitter
FTTP
FTTC:Fiber To The CurbFTTCab :Fiber To The Cabinet
FTTH :Fiber To The HomeFTTB :Fiber To The Building
Operation System
Internet
Leased Line
VOIP
PSTN
Video
Twisted Pair
ONT
ONT
Access: Fiber To The X (FTTx)Access: Fiber To The X (FTTx)
63©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Ethernet in the First MileEthernet in the First Mile
IEEE 802.3 Study Group started November 2000
Originally called Ethernet in the Last Mile
EFM Goals: Media: Phone wire, Fiber Speed: 125 kbps to 1 Gbps
Distance: 1500 ft, 18000 ft, 1 km -
40 km
Both point-to-point and point-to-multipoint
EPON = point-to-multipoint fiber
Ref: http://www.ieee802.org/3/efm/public/index.htm
64©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
EFM PHYsEFM PHYs
2BASE-TL
Baseband PHY based on SHDSL, L 2.7km
10PASS-TS
Duplex on a single voice UTP pair using VDSL QAM or DMT, S0.7km. PassVoice+Data
-O = Central Office, -R = CPE
100BASE-LX10
Duplex Fiber PHY w 10km 1310nm laser
100BASE-BX10-D Bidirectional 1550nm downstream laser
100BASE-BX10-U
Bidirectional 1310nm upstream laser
1000BASE-LX10
Extended (10km) 1310nm long-wavelength laser
1000BASE-BX10-D Bidirectional 1490nm downstream laser
1000BASE-BX10-U
Bidirectional 1310nm upstream laser
1000BASE-PX10-D
PON 1490nm downstream laser 10 km
1000BASE-PX10-U
PON 1310nm upstream laser 10 km
1000BASE-PX20-D
PON 1490nm downstream laser 20 km
1000BASE-PX20-U
PON 1310nm upstream laser 20 km
65©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Passive Optical NetworksPassive Optical Networks
A single fiber is used to support multiple customers
No active equipment in the path Highly reliable
Both upstream and downstream traffic on ONE fiber (1490nm down, 1310nm up). OLT assigned time slots upstream.
Optical Line Terminal (OLT) in central office
Optical Network Terminal (ONT) on customer premises
Optical Network Unit (ONU) at intermediate points w xDSL
ONT
OLT
ONU
67©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Broadcast Video Over PONBroadcast Video Over PON
Analog or Digital Video on 1550 nm
ONT
ONT
ONT
UpstreamUpstream
DownstreamDownstream
Existing or New Coax
OLT
• MPEG/DVB-C• GBE • E1• SDH
GBE E1SDH
3 Wavelengths
On One Fiber
68©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
STM1ONT
STM1ONT
STM1ONT
PON ApplicationsPON Applications
ATM
10/100BT
Remote DSLAM/DLC
nxT1/E1ONT E1
ONT
1. FTTP
4. DSLAM Aggregation
2. Cellular Backhaul
3. CATV MSO
69©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Why PONs?Why PONs?
Reduced OpEx: Passive network
High reliability Reduced truck rolls
Reduced power expenses
Shorter installation times
Reduced CapEx:
16 -128 customers per fiber
1 Fiber +1+N transceivers vs N Fibers + 2N transceivers
Increased Revenue Opportunities: Multi-service: Data, E1/T1, Voice, Video
Scalable:
CO Equipment Shared New customers can be added easily
Bandwidth is Shared Customer bandwidth can be changed
70©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Types of PONsTypes of PONs
APON: Initial name for ATM based PON spec. Designed by Full Service Access Network (FSAN) group
BPON: Broadband PON standard specified in ITU G.983.1 thru G.893.7 = APON renamed
155 or 622 Mbps downstream, 155 upstream
EPON: Ethernet based PON draft being designed by IEEE 802.3ah.
1000 Mbps down and 1000 Mbps up.
GPON: Gigabit PON standard specified in ITU G.984.1 and G.984.2
1244 and 2488 Mbps Down, 155/622/1244/2488 up
71©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
PON DevelopmentsPON Developments
GPON recommendations G.984.x are out.
EPON draft is progressing fast.
FCC removed fibers from unbundling
SBC, Verizon, Bellsouth issued an RFP in USA
Carriers in Japan and Europe are seriously investigating FTTH
Most big telecom vendors in US were caught off-guard with no PON equipment
Most action in Access than in Core or Metro
Venture Financing for PON is up
Several PON companies received funding this year
Over 800 Communities in USA are investigating fibers to home using PONs
Fiber-to-the-Home Installations Expected to Reach Approximately One Million by 2004 [FTTH Council]
Conclusion: 2004 will be the year of PON
73©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
SummarySummary1.
2004 will be the year of PONs
2.
PONs reduce OpEx and CapEx for carriers and increase carrier revenue opportunities with value-added services
3.
Multi-service support in next-generation EPON products is a key differentiator.
4.
EPON products need to offer quad-play: Data, voice, video, and TDM to be effective
74©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
IP Over IP Over DWDMDWDM
Raj Jain CTO and Co-founder
Nayna Networks, Inc. 180 Rose Orchard Way, San Jose, CA 95134
Email: jain@acm.orgwww.nayna.com
and http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~jain/
77©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
IP over DWDM (Past)IP over DWDM (Past)
SONET ADM
SONET ADM
ATM Switch
ATM Switch
IP Router
IP Router
IP Router
DWDM TE
ATM Switch
SONET ADM
78©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
IP over DWDM (Future)IP over DWDM (Future)IP
Router
IP Router
IP Router
DWDM TE
79©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Telecom vs Data NetworksTelecom vs Data NetworksTelecom Networks Data Networks
Topology Discovery Manual AutomaticPath Determination Manual AutomaticCircuit Provisioning Manual No CircuitsTransport & Control Planes Separate MixedUser and Provider Trust No YesProtection Static using Rings No Protection
80©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
IP over DWDM IssuesIP over DWDM Issues1. Data and Control plane separation2. Circuits3. Signaling4. Addressing5. Protection and Restoration
81©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Signaling
Data
Today:
Tomorrow:
Routing Messages
Control and Data Plane SeparationControl and Data Plane Separation
Separate control and data channels
IP routing protocols (OSPF and IS-IS) are being extended
82©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)
Allows virtual circuits in IP Networks (May 1996)
Each packet has a virtual circuit number called ‘label’
Label determines the packet’s queuing and forwarding
Circuits are called Label Switched Paths (LSPs)
LSP’s have to be set up before use
Allows traffic engineering
PBXPBX PBXPBX
1 3 5 2 3
83©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
IPIP--Based Control PlaneBased Control Plane
Control is by IP packets (electronic). Data can be any kind of packets (IPX, ATM cells).
MPLS
PSCPSC
IPIP
PSC
IPIP
PSC
IP
Data Plane
Control Plane
PSC = Packet Switch Capable Nodes
84©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
MPMPλλSS
Control is by IP packets (electronic). Data plane consists of wavelength circuits
Multiprotocol Lambda Switching (October 1999)
Ref: Hassan and Jain, “High-Performance TCP/IP”
Prentice Hall 2003.
LSCLSC
LSC
LSC
Data Plane
LSC = Lambda Switch Capable Nodes = Optical Cross Connects = OXC
IPIP
IPIPIP
Control Plane
85©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
IPIP
IPIPIP
Data Plane
Control Plane
GMPLSGMPLS
Data Plane = Wavelengths, Fibers, SONET Frames, Packets (October 2000)
Two separate routes: Data route and control route
86©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
GMPLS: Layered ViewGMPLS: Layered View
IP Control Plane
Packet Switching
SONET/SDH/OTN
Wavelength Switching
Fiber Switching
87©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
GMPLS: Hierarchical View GMPLS: Hierarchical View
Packets over SONET over Wavelengths over Fibers
Packet switching regions, TDM regions, Wavelength switching regions, fiber switching regions
Allows data plane connections between SONET ADMs, PXCs. FSCs, in addition to routers
SONET
TDMPXCSONET
TDMRouter RouterPXC
LSCPSC TDM
PXCFSC
88©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
MPLS vs GMPLSMPLS vs GMPLS
XC XC
Issue MPLS GMPLSData & Control Plane Same channel SeparateTypes of Nodesand labels
PacketSwitching
PSC, TDM, LSC, FSC, …
Bandwidth Continuous Discrete: OC-n, λ’s, ..# of Parallel Links Small 100-1000’sPort IP Address One per port Unnumbered
Fault Detection In-band Out-of-band or In-Band
λ’s, ..
90©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Fiber Access Thru Sewer Tubes (FAST)Fiber Access Thru Sewer Tubes (FAST)
Right of ways is difficult in dense urban areas
Sewer Network: Completely connected system of pipes connecting every home and office
Municipal Governments find it easier and more profitable to let you use sewer than dig street
Installed in Zurich, Omaha, Albuquerque, Indianapolis, Vienna, Ft Worth, Scottsdale, ...
Corrosion resistant inner ducts containing up to 216 fibers are mounted within sewer pipe using a robot called Sewer Access Module (SAM)
Ref: http://www.citynettelecom.com,
NFOEC 2001, pp. 331
91©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
FAST InstallationFAST Installation
1. Robots map the pipe2. Install rings3. Install ducts4. Thread fibersFast Restoration: Broken sewer pipes replaced with
minimal disruption
92©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
1.
High speed routers IP directly over DWDM
2.
Separation of control and data plane IP-Based control plane
3.
Transport Plane = Packets MPLS Transport Plane = Wavelengths
MPλS Transport Plane = λ, SONET, Packets GMPLS
4.
UNI allows users to setup paths on demand
SummarySummary
93©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Summary: Key PointsSummary: Key Points
1.
ILEC vs CLECs Evolution vs Revolution2.
Core market is stagnant No OOO Switching and Long Haul Transport
3.
Metro Ethernet Ethernet Service vs Transport Next-Gen SONET vs Ethernet with RPR
4.
PONs provide a scalable, upgradeable, cost effective solution.5.
IP over DWDM: MPλS, GMPLS, PWE3
94©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
Standards OrganizationsStandards Organizations
IETF: www.ietf.org
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)
IP over Optical (IPO)
Traffic Engineering (TE)
Common Control and Management Plane (CCAMP)
Optical Internetworking Forum (OIF): www.oiforum.com
ANSI T1X1.5: http://www.t1.org/t1x1/_x15-hm.htm
ITU, www.itu.ch, Study Group 15 Question 14 and Question 12
Optical Domain Service Interface (ODSI) -
Completed December 2000
95©2003 Raj JainGlobecom 2003
ReferencesReferences
Detailed references in http://www.cis.ohio- state.edu/~jain/refs/opt_refs.htm
Recommended books on optical networking, http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~jain/refs/opt_book.htm
Optical Networking and DWDM, http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~jain/cis788-
99/dwdm/index.html
IP over Optical: A summary of issues, (internet draft) http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~jain/ietf/issues.html
Lightreading,
http://www.lightreading.com